The British Navy Past and Present
Published by The Navy League
Chapter III OUR PRESENT IRONCLAD FLEET It was inevitable that a reaction should follow upon the train of reasoning which produced such vessels as the Inflexible, Ajax, Agamemnon, Colossus and Edinburgh. This took the form of abandoning the turret for the barbette, and adding a secondary armament to the four heavy guns. Unfortunately, the reaction did not extend to the armour, which had only now been improved to a certain degree by imparting to the wrought-iron plate a hardened surface. Thus it was still necessary to retain a considerable thickness over a small area; While the greater portion of the hull, including the ends, had no protection. The ships designed and constructed on these principles were those known as the "Admiral" class, consisting of the Collingwood, Howe, Rodney, Anson, Camperdown, Benbow. All were under 11,000 tons, and four of them carried as a main armament two pairs of 67-ton guns, each pair mounted en barbette at the fore and after portions of the ship. The auxiliary battery comprised six 6-in. guns, three on each broadside. In the case of the Collingwood, she being nearly 1,000 tons smaller, four 45-ton guns were carried instead of the heavier ordnance. A greater departure was made in the Benbow, for a single 110-ton gun at each end took the place of the two 67-ton guns, while her secondary armament was increased to ten 6-in. guns. The offensive power of these ships is therefore considerable, while they were given an advance of three knots in speed over the Inflexible. A special feature also was their large coal supply, a matter which had not always hitherto received the attention it deserved. The defect of the "Admiral" class is the absence of protection to the auxiliary battery, and to so much of the bow and stern. By additions of weight during construction they also drew nearly two feet more water on completion than as originally designed, which unfits them for service in rough waters. They are condemned by many officers for these reasons, but they are still formidable Ships, and would constitute an effective reserve squadron-for home waters in time of war.
I have dwelt on these vessels because they were the forerunners of the present type of first class battleship, of which we now have a considerable force. Hitherto we had resolutely set our faces against the construction of any war vessel which should exceed 12,000 tons. Though this maximum had in several cases been exceeded by Italy, other nations had not followed her example. They were doubtless influenced by the "too many eggs in one basket" argument, and sensible of the risks of disablement by ram or torpedo.
But the development and Increase of quick-fire guns now carried in battleships made it evident that in new con-structions better provision must be made- for protecting a larger portion of the hull and the secondary armament. No decrease of gun-power was likely to be approved, while naval opinion was strong in favour of high speed and large coal supply. As, moreover, the armour had not then been improved sufficiently to warrant- any considerable reduction in thickness, it was, perhaps, inevitable that new designs would, in order to secure all these advantages, have to exhibit a large advance in total dimensions. Hence, when the uneasiness of the country at our tardy naval progress encouraged the Government at the end of 1888 to prepare a substantial programme of shipbuilding, no objection was found with the Royal Sovereign and her sisters because it was proposed they should be of 14,150 tons. Yet the actual armament was not greatly in excess of that given to the Camperdown, of 10,600 tons. The new vessels carried four 67-ton guns and ten 6-in. guns, or all addition only of four 6-in. guns. The increase of 3,500 tons in displacement was in a great measure absorbed in additional armour - providing casemates for 6-in. guns, and protecting a larger area of the hull. Thus it came about that these battleships actually carried 4,500 tons of armour externally and internally; almost one-third of their total displacement. Additional weight also was required for more powerful machinery to obtain a speed of 17 knots., while the demand that our Fleet should be able to act at a distance from its base necessitated an increase to the coal supply. This is the more inperative now, owing to the daily consumption of fuel for lighting, distilling and other purposes, which is a considerable drain upon the bunkers even when at anchor.
Except in the ease of one of the eight of the Royal Sovereign class - the Hood - these vessels carry their 67-ton guns en barbette in positions similar to the "Admiral" class. A great change was, however, made in the disposition of the auxiliary armament. The ten 6-in. guns of the Benbow are all or one deck in an unprotected battery. Hence, a single large shell bursting in this part would create great havoc with guns and gunners. Greater distribution, as well as protection, was seen to be desirable. In the Royal Sovereign these improvements were obtained by placing the guns in two tiers, six in the battery, and four above on the upper deck. The former were isolated from each other by casemates, while the latter had stout shield protection. These also are now being placed in casemates. It is curious we should thus, in a measure, revert to the principle of the old two-decker, and no less probable that an extension of this system would mark future construction. Such an extension is, in fact, visible in the vessels which immediately followed the Royal Sovereign class. The Majestic, Magni-ficent, Caesar; Hannibal, Illustrious, Jupiter, Mars, Prince George, and Victorious exhibit for their advance to 14,900 tons a considerable accession of guns on the broadside. Besides a pair of 12-in. guns at each end, they carry twelve 6-in. guns, and have, as a new feature, sixteen 12-pounder guns - eight on each side - as a supplementary armament. Thus, counting the heavy guns - four of 50-tons - which can all fire on either side, we have in these ships a broadside fire of eighteen guns, a condition which has not been reached since the first days of ironclads. Furthermore all the 6-in. guns are in casemates, hence well protected. It may be asked, How has it been possible to obtain all this with only aim addition to the displacement of 800 tons? The solution is simple. By the use of improved armour, at last given to us by the Harvey process, we have been enabled to dispense with those enormous thicknesses which hitherto encumbered our vessels. In place of an 18-in. compound plate considered necessary up to the days of the Royal Sovereign, we could now obtain adequate protection to the water-line with a 9-in. Harvey plate, reinforced by the protective deck brought down to the lower edge of the belt, instead of joining the upper part. Such is the defence for the hull of the Majestic class, and thus we could provide additional casemates and cover a larger area of the side without any considerable additions to the total weight of armour carried. Taking them all round, these vessels are splendid specimens of naval architecture, and great favour-ites with the officers who have served in them. That they are costly, and equally susceptible with others half their size to the ram or torpedo, are points equally uncontrovertible.
They do not dispose of the case in favour of moderate dimensions being also represented in our fleet.
From the foregoing it might be supposed that after the Inflexible we had abandoned the turret system in favour of the barbette for all sea-going battleships. That this was not the case the following remarks will amply show. I have alluded to the favour accorded to the Dreadnought by naval officers. The influence of this was sufficient to cause the construction of two ships the Nile and Trafalgar - on her lines; that is, with a turret at each end containing a pair of 67-ton guns, while, as a concession to the impression that some auxiliary armament was now necessary, these vessels mounted in a battery between the turrets six guns of 4.7-in. calibre. Such an addition to the main armament of vessels like the Nile and Trafalgar of 12,000 tons is very inadequate, as the 4.7-in. gun is a weak piece, only suitable for cruisers.* In other respects these two later turret ships are powerful craft. They are surpassed only by one of the Royal Sovereign class -the Hood - which, in deference to the same feeling which produced the Nile and Trafalgar, was given turrets, while in all the others the barbette system was retained. The Hood's superiority to the Nile and Trafalgar consists in her carrying ten 6-in. guns as the auxiliary armament. There is yet to mention the single -turret ships, because they received their final development in the Victoria and Sans Pareil. It is safe to prophesy that for sea-going purposes the single-turret ship will never be repeated. The type originated at a time when an exaggerated view of the value of the ram prevailed. This was in the early seventies and the outcome was a small ram-the - the Rupert - with a single turret forward. The idea was to fight end on, and having embarrassed the enemy with bow fire, his discomfort was to be completed with the ram.*The 4.7-in. guns have now been replaced by 6-in.
There was sufficient sense in this view to convince the theorists and cause an extension of the principle. Hence the Hero and Conqueror succeeded the Rupert with the single turret forward. The weight of this necessitated a very low bow, and therefore militated against their use for ocean service. But the principle survived, and found its climax in two later vessels. Each step was marked by an advance In size: Rupert, 5,000 tons Conqueror, 6,500; while in the Victoria and her sister there was a jump to 10,500 tons. But in these the single turret had to bear two of the much abused 110-ton guns. It was an immense burden to concentrate at one end; and when we think of this weight augmented by a great mass of water in that locality, as on that terrible day when the Victoria dis-appeared from sight, one cannot be altogether surprised that her buoyancy was overcome.
The Sans Pareil remains as a solitary specimen of the large single-turret ironclad, her monster ordnance supple-mented by a 10-in. gun aft and twelve 6-in. guns on the broadside. She is not likely to be repeated. When we reflect that for many generations the wooden fleets included several sizes of ships considered fit for the line of battle, and that experience had shown the usefulness of moderate dimensions for general purposes, it was only natural that this tradition should be perpetuated ill our early ironclads. We did not limit our construction to the larger type, but at the same time built comparatively small armoured ships, ranging from 4,000 to 8,000 tons. As we discontinued the practice some years ago, and many of those which formerly did excellent service have disappeared from the list, it is unnecessary to describe them in detail. Among many excellent characteristics, not the least valuable was that of light draught, which enabled them to pass through the Suez Canal when required to proceed to Eastern waters. In the desire that every ship should be the best of its kind, the second-class ironclad gradually dropped out, but it was revived to a very small extent in the programme which gave us the .Royal Sovereign. Two vessels, designated then second-class battleships, were squeezed in, and, on com-pletion as the Centurion and Barfleur, gave us an excellent type for distant stations. But during incubation they had grown to 10,500 tons, and eventually were added to the first-class list. Their main armament consists of four 29-ton guns, supplemented by a battery, which when first constructed consisted of ten 4.7-in. guns, but which have since been replaced by the same number of 6-in. guns. The favour with which they were received led to an improved type in the Renown, with an increased displace-ment of 12,350 tons and an auxiliary battery of ten 6-in. guns the main armament remaining the same as in the Centurion and Barfleur. She also carries fourteen 12-pounders and has five torpedo discharges, two of which are submerged. A considerable portion of the water line is protected by eight inches of hardened steel armour. This with a reduced thickness of six inches is extended up to the battery deck, where six of the 6-in. guns are in casemates, the other four guns being above. With an extreme speed of eighteen knots the Renown is little inferior to her larger sisters, though of course her 10-in. guns cannot compare in penetration and shell power with the 12-in. guns of the Majestic.
Averse to departing from the principle of mounting the heavy guns in pairs, but desirous of retaining the best weapon, the designers of the Ocean class - which may be considered as successors of the Renown elected to mount in them four 12-in. and twelve 6-in. guns, while only increasing the dis-placement by 600 tons. Such an amount would not alone suffice for the additional armament, but weight must be saved in other directions, and in these vessels it is obtained by reducing the thickness of the armour at the water line to six inches. Some regard this as a dangerous reduction in view of the power of modern guns, and the fact that 7-in. and 8-in. quick firers are now being carried as a secondary armament. Personally I should advocate water-line armour of eight inches for such vessels as these, which might be required to cope with battleships of larger dimensions. Probably some such consideration led to the Duncan class, now just completed, being given seven inches of water-line armour. This, with a slight addition to the armament, and an increase of extreme speed to nineteen knots, brings their displacement up to 14,000 tons, or practically the same dimensions as the Royal Sovereign design of 1888. The second-class battleship has so grown since its birth in the Centurion, and Barfleur that it has again disappeared, or become merged in its sister of the first-class, to which I must now return.
The success of the Majestic class led the Admiralty to supplement these nine vessels by eight others of slightly modified design. The Formidable, Implacable, Irresistable, Venerable, Bulwark, London, Queen, and Prince of Wales, with practically the same armament, are more efficiently protected by having the bow forward of the 9-in. and 6-in. armour covered with 2-in. plates, which at the stem are carried below the ram. This will prevent the ship, when chasing, having her bow perforated by small projectiles, the effect of which in the consequent inrush of water might necessitate the ship stopping to remedy the evil. This pro-longation of the belt forward is carried out also in the Duncan class and later armoured cruisers. With more powerful machinery to give a speed of eighteen knots the Formidable group have a displacement of 15,000 tons.
We had hitherto considered that two sizes of heavy guns. In a battleship would suffice the 12-in. for the attack of that portion most thickly armoured, while the 6-in. projectiles would penetrate the thinner plating and gun shields, in addition to that considerable area of the hull without any protection. The increased power of the 6-in. gun, due to greater length and a better propellant, however, led to the medium armour applied for protection being given increased resisting power, chiefly due to improved methods of manufacture. Thus it outmatched the medium gun, or rather the projectiles, which were broken up on the very hard surface imparted to the plate. Hence it became necessary either to replace the 6-in. piece entirely by one of heavier calibre or to supplement it by something intermediate between that size and the 12-in. various considerations at the time led to the latter course being adopted in the next and latest type of battleship. In the King Edward VII., Commonwealth,, Dominion, New Zealand, Hindustan, Britannia, Hibernia and Africa, now building, the armament consists of four 12-in., four 9.2-in. and ten 6-in. guns as the main weapons of attack, while for auxiliary purposes they carry fourteen 12-pounders and six smaller quick-firing guns, with four torpedo tubes, all of which are operated from below the water-line. The 9.2-in. guns are mounted singly in casemates, two on each side above the 6-in. battery, so that two can fire right ahead and two astern. The 6-in. guns are placed in a central battery, five on each side, each piece being separated from its neighbour by an armoured screen thus the casemate system is modified by the gunroom being open at the rear. Should therefore a projectile penetrate the side it will not have armour in rear against which it might explode in cl6se proximity to the gun, while if explosion is effected on passing through the front protection adjacent guns are screened from the pieces of the projectile. This battery is practically an armoured redoubt secured from raking fire by 12-in. armour at the fore and after ends, while on the sides the lower part has 8-in. and the upper part 7-in. plates. The belt, 9-in. thick at the central portion, is carried to the ends, though in each case with a considerably reduced thickness. All this armour is of the latest hardened type.
Though it is not attempted in such a class of war vessel to obtain the extreme speeds considered essential in a first--class cruiser, the advantage of a knot or two in a group of battleships over an opposing squadron in allowing an advantageous position to be assumed is fully recognised in the design of the King Edward VII. class, for they have machinery for a maximum speed of 18.5 knots an hour. When we remember that it was considered sufficient to provide for an extreme speed of l3.5 knots in the Inflexible, the advance made in this respect in five and twenty years can be realised. To combine all the qualities here enumerated in the King Edward VII. it has been necessary to increase the length from 400 ft. in the Formidable to 425 ft., and the displacement from 15,000 tons to 16,350 tons. This is the largest battleship yet constructed, and it involves the expenditure of nearly a million and a half. It remains to be seen whether an even further advance is in store for us; but under any Circumstances with such conditions the country whose most vital interests depend upon naval supremacy cannot expect security without paying all insurance adequate to the issue at stake.Those who advocate limiting size in, and expenditure on, a single ship will assert there is some confirmation of their views by the action of the British Government in purchasing two battleships constructed for Chili by Armstrong and Vickers, Maxim & Co. Of approximately 12,000 tons displacement, and costing us just under a million sterling apiece, they combine a powerful armament, good protection and high speed. They have a pair of 10-in. guns In barbettes at each end; fourteen 7.5-in. on the broadside - ten In a central citadel and four in casemates above. The citadel guns are screened from each other and in rear by armoured screens, so that they are not so boxed in as if within casemates. They have, besides, -fourteen 14-pounders and two submerged torpedo tubes. The water line armour at central portion is seven inches thick, and this is carried up to cover the side of the citadel. The belt is tapered to a thickness of three inches towards bow and stern. Engines sufficiently powerful to drive these vessels twenty knots an hour in smooth water are provided, so that they may, be considered the fastest battleships afloat at present. Whether it is necessary in this class of war vessel to have such a high speed is open to argument, for every additional knot is very costly in the extra weight of machinery involved, which weight might otherwise have gone into more armament, armour or coal supply. There is no question that speed is all important in the cruiser. For the battle-ship it is no doubt important to rapidly close an enemy and take up an advantageous position; but the main point is to keep there, which will principally depend upon superior gun fire, its weight and accuracy. If your adversary has the mastery in this respect your superior speed may then help you out of a hole, but on the other hand may have disappeared from the punishment inflicted by a more weighty armament. My readers may follow up the argu-ment, but there is no doubt that in the Triumph and Swiftsure, which are the names given to our acquisitions, we have acquired two very useful vessels.
[Index] [Chapter IV]
